The Manifesto | The Dominion | Texts and Articles | Review | Links | ACCUEIL (FR) | HOME (EN)


Parents - by Choice, Chance or Design ?
(An endeavour to evolve a deterministic model to compute
the birth dates of parents from any chart of an individual)

by R. Ramakrishnan


Apparently from the perspective of a child, it does not have a choice about who its parents are. Researchers of the realm of 'after-life' give the impression to the contrary and insist that we indeed choose our parents before being born to them. This realm is however beyond the scope of the exercise that we discuss now which is primarily based on astrological charts of children and their respective parents and an attempt to identify and interpret possible planetary patterns that may establish whether the relationship between a child and its parents is by chance or by design. If it is by chance, there should be no discernable patterns and even if there are, the probability of their occurrence should be below what is acceptable to conclude that there may indeed be a design involved in the relationship. However, if there do appear patterns that are very evident and if it were possible to quantify these patterns to connect each child-parent pair accounting for the exceptions that are contrary to the evident patterns as well, it may be possible to conclude that such relationships may be by design alone.

The idea of discerning astrological patterns differs with each researcher and forms a wide spectrum. Fellow researcher and friend Didier Castille, attempts to look into patterns considering the bare minimum of parameters that have an astrological bearing. This is at one end of the spectrum. Some researchers that I have interacted with would consider it sacrilege to even consider an idea that is not sanctioned by astrological texts of yore, which is the other end of the spectrum. I have considered a 'middle path' (that may shift to either side of the middle, depending upon the perception of the reader). I do consider astrological parameters for pattern recognition but do not take them to be sacrosanct. The sanctity of the astrological dicta is allowed to be established by actuality.

Any research requires an assumption to be made about the idea being considered and attempting to prove or disprove this assumption on the basis of a large set of related data. The assumption made here is that a child-parent relationship is by design. The attempt to prove or disprove this assumption is made in terms of the twin exercise of pattern establishment and building a deterministic model based on them. The model in turn would validate the astrological dicta on which the patterns have been established, if it were to be seen that every marked planetary combination or pattern, results in a similar outcome in all charts in which they occur. A statistical model may establish the probability of a particular pattern giving a desired result but it is only a deterministic model that will indicate how a pattern would behave in each specific case or a set of very similar charts answering all three questions of How? Why? And When? A deterministic model may be seen as a limiting extension of a statistical model where the probability of a pattern to give a projected result is either 1 or 0. For the exercise to follow, we will limit ourselves to the study of a child-mother pair. The arguments here would be equally applicable to the child-father pair as well.

Generally, the accuracy or credibility of the results of an exercise of this nature is assessed and determined by the extent of the data used or the 'sample size'. The study is based on a sample size of 796 child-mother pairs as of now. In my opinion, this is not a big enough data volume to establish anything conclusively. But strong pointers do emerge from it that may be validated when the sample swells to more acceptable levels.

This paper is being written with the intention of sharing my thought process from the inception of the idea to evolve a deterministic model, to the level that it has reached at present with a view of eliciting suggestions and encouraging involvement. Astrological parameters considered for discerning patterns and possibilities evaluated to design and develop the model are discussed at every stage of evolution presenting figures that necessitated or prompted such a direction.

To be able to compute a date of an event relative to a chart, it is necessary to have some form of a calendar that is unique to the chart and that marks time in the past and future with reference to the birth date particulars of the chart. It is also necessary to have some form of correspondence between the planetary positions in the chart and the parameters in terms of which such a calendar is expressed. The Dasa schemes of Vedic astrology satisfy both these requirements. The Vimsottari dasa[1] scheme in particular provides a direct correspondence between each of the nine primary celestial entities (the Sun through Saturn and the two nodes of the Moon) considered in Vedic astrology and the axis of time with reference to the moment of birth. Every moment of time along the axis of time is expressed as a definite sequence of planets - a sequence of five to six positions defining the span of one day. This scheme has been considered as the mainstay for all analysis in this paper. In any such planetary sequence, the first two positions are of key significance as the planets located in these two positions define the overall quality, direction and nature of the events to take place during the period of their combined operation. If we were to name the first position as that of the 'initiator' and the second as that of the 'giver', the 'giver' gets the pride of place for making an event happen.
 

Functional eligibility

Astrologically, the fourth-house, the dispositor of the fourth cusp and the Moon have a direct bearing on the entity 'mother'. Hence, the planet that is deemed the dispositor of the fourth cusp, the planet(s) resident in the fourth house and the Moon, should be the main contributors in identifying the possible birth date of the mother. The Vimsottari dasa calendar for each chart is used to locate the date of birth as a corresponding planetary sequence. To begin with if the dispositor of the fourth cusp and the Moon are taken to be eligible from the perspective of having the primary say in pointing the mother's birth date, then one of them should occur at the second position in the planetary sequence the position of the 'giver'. The table below shows how this concept is reflected in actuality.
 
Table-1
Number of child-mother
pairs considered
Number of instances where one
of the entities considered eligible
is a 'giver' in the planetary
sequence corresponding to the
mother's date of birth
Percentage occurrence
796 195 24.50

The inference drawn from the figures in the table above is that (if the assumption that the child-mother relationship is by design then) there are other eligibility criteria to be included to identify the possible 'giver' from among the nine entities the Sun through Saturn and the two nodes of the Moon. Consideration of only the dispositor of the fourth cusp from the ascendant and the Moon is seen to be grossly inadequate.

Going back to the astrological texts reveals, that it is suggested to consider a chart for analysis from other points of reference also, in addition to the ascendant. These points of reference are the position of the Sun, and the position of the Moon. Expanding the eligibility criteria to include the dispositor of the fourth cusps from the Sun and the Moon and planets resident in such fourth houses, the instances where one of those from this set occurs as a 'giver' is seen to increase (see table 2 below).
 
Table-2
Number of child-mother
pairs considered
Number of instances where one
of the entities considered eligible 
is a 'giver' in the planetary
sequence corresponding to the
mother's date of birth
Percentage occurrence
796 383 48.12

The inclusion of the additional criteria to identify eligibility does seem to have increased the incidence of the occurrence of an eligible entity as a 'giver'. Yet, a large gap still remains (51.88%) to be accounted for.

By the inclusion of the additional criteria above, another peculiarity is introduced into the exercise that of an entity being eligible on a number of counts to make the event happen. For instance, a planet can be the dispositor of the fourth cusp from the ascendant and the Sun, making it eligible on two counts. If the two fourth house dispositors were to be the Moon, the count of eligibility will rise to three. In addition, if this entity were to be resident in any one of the fourth houses, the eligibility count climbs to four. This peculiarity would have existed in the analysis of Table 1 as well, but its effects (if any) will be more pronounced here. It will be interesting to see the correspondence between the count of eligibility (henceforth referred to as E-score) and the incidence of occurrence as a 'giver' for all entities (Table 3).
 
Table-3
Correspondence of count of eligibility (E-Score) to incidence of occurrence as 'giver'
E-Score 0 1 2 >2 Total
Number of entities with E-Score 3810 2767 565 22 7164 ( 9 x 796)
Occurrence as 'giver' 413 308 72 3 792 / 383
Percentage occurrence 10.84 11.13 12.74 13.63 48.12

The trend above indicates that the percentage occurrence as a 'giver' increases with the E-score.

Astrological texts also suggest that the position of the significator of a house be considered as yet another reference point (Brihat Parasara Hora Sastra[2]). This suggestion opens up new possibilities. One of the texts Jaataka Paarijata[3], mentions that the Moon and Mars, be considered as significators of 'Mother'. Then there is the concept of chart specific significators or 'Chara Kaaraka'. [4]. So we have two further reference points in addition to the ascendant, the Sun and the Moon - namely, Mars and the chart specific significator. (If the chart specific significator were to be the nodes, then there will be three reference points.)

Yet another entity that can be included into the eligible list of entities that represent the fourth-house, is the dispositor of the fourth Dvaadasaamsa[5] from the Dvaadasaamsa ascendant.

Table 4 provides an analysis of the incidence of 'givers' from the set of eligible entities by the new criteria and the equivalent 'E-score Occurrence' correspondence analysis.
 
 
Table-4
Correspondence of count of eligibility (E-Score) to incidence of occurrence as 'giver'
E-Score 0 1 2 >2 Total
Number of entities with E-Score 1638 2714 1742 1070 7164 ( 9 x 796)
Occurrence as 'giver' 156 281 201 158 796 / 640 
Percentage occurrence 9.52 10.35 11.54 14.77 80.40

Here we see the consolidation of the trend that the incidence of occurrence as a giver increases with an increase in the count of eligibility. This in itself does not prove anything. If the same exercise as above is attempted with a different set of eligibility criteria for instance the 5th house dispositors from each of the reference points with the replacement of Jupiter for the Moon (as the significator of children) and chart specific siginificator of children in place of that of the mother, and consider their frequency of occurrence as the 'giver' in the planetary sequence corresponding to the date of the mother, a very similar pattern is observed. The trends shown in the tables here only affirm the idea that an entity with multiple eligibilities has a better probability of being a 'giver'.

The incidence of occurrence of almost 20% of 'givers' that are outside the eligibility set is still to be accounted for. This calls for further expanding the eligibility set to include planets that interact with those in the eligibility set by virtue of their placement in the chart. Also, it is seen that less than 15% of those entities that are eligible within a given E-score category become givers. This necessitates grading of eligible entities within a chart with similar E-scores according to their apparent strengths attributable to their position in the chart and their interaction with other planets, in order to identify the strongest among them that go on to become a 'giver'. It can also be inferred from the table above that mere eligibility on a number of counts alone does not ensure a planet's occurrence as a giver. Between two planets with dissimilar E-scores, the one with a lower score can take precedence over the other with a higher score if the former is stronger by position while the latter is weaker on this count.
 

Positional eligibility

The arguments above point to assessing a planet's occurrence as a 'giver' under two heads its positional attributes and its functional attributes and consider a blend of the two tendencies. The analysis so far has been made only on the functional attributes. We will consider an example positional attribute the proximity of a planet to the Sun, and analyze its bearing on the effectiveness of an eligible planet to be a 'giver'. Texts suggest various sets of angular distances for planets to be considered 'combust' a term that is used to describe a planet's close proximity to the Sun in a chart and that suggests that the planet in question is adversely affected. We will consider a standard angular separation of 7º 30' between the Sun and any other planet within which the planet is deemed combust. Table 5 lists the occurrence of planets as givers under two heads combust and not combust. A further distinction is made between planets possessing an even or odd number of individual 'blemishes'. The preceding statement needs elaboration.

Planets are attributed with a number of positions of decadence like debilitation or fall, positions in the zodiac that are considered weak when viewed collectively based on its position in a number of divisional charts, certain other sign specific degrees that are considered 'fatal', positioned between malefic planets in the preceding and following signs, etc. Some consider a planet in apparent retrograde motion also to be in a situation of depravity. Analysis of a number of charts seems to suggest that a planet sporting an even number of such blemishes point towards a particular result while those sporting an odd number point to the contrary. This is only an observation that needs to be validated. Including this observation into our earlier list of assumptions, we can incorporate this additional category in our analysis of planetary behavior. This is what has been attempted in Table 5.
 
 
 
Table -5
Effect of the phenomenon of combustion on the prospects of a planet being a 'giver'
Planet Moon Mars Mercury Jupiter Venus Saturn Raahu Ketu
Planet being
'combust'
Even blemishes 0/13

0.00%

4/39

10.26%

10/90

11.11%

4/16

25.00%

11/57

19.30%

7/16

43.75%

2/28

7.14%

3/26

11.54%

Odd blemishes 1/17

5.88%

0/17

0.00%

13/88

14.77%

2/16

12.50%

12/47

25.53%

2/19

10.53%

1/11

9.09%

1/10

10.00%

Total 1/30

3.33%

4/56

7.14%

23/178

12.92%

6/32

18.75%

23/104

22.12%

9/35

25.71%

3/39

7.69%

9/36

11.11%

Planet not being 'combust' 62/766

8.09%

53/740

7.16%

79/618

12.78%

129/764

16.88%

130/692

18.79%

136/761

17.87%

143/757

18.89%

48/760

6.32%

Analysis of the table above brings into focus many interesting features. Firstly it points to the strong possibility of some of the planets being less susceptible to be a 'giver' when combust and some being more susceptible when subject to this assumed debility. Mars, Saturn and Ketu show a higher inclination of being a 'giver' when combust. This feature is particularly evident very strongly in the case of Saturn.

The figures in the table above do not distinguish a planet's occurrence as a 'giver' on the basis of their functional eligibilities (E-scores). Considerations of E-Scores at this level of analysis will require the sample size to be in the range of about 10,000 charts at least to give meaningful insights.

Several other positional combinations have been analyzed in this manner to ascertain the preferred demeanor of a planet under a given condition. Some of these are planet specific, while some are sign specific. It should be emphasized here that the pointers gleamed from such analysis are merely what the word literally means - pointers. Anything definite about a particular mode of behavior can be conclusively accepted only after they have been seen to be exhibited without exception across a fairly large sample consisting of several thousands of charts. The conditions under which planetary demeanor have been analyzed are those that are astrologically deemed to be of significance, as given in astrological texts. For the sake of brevity, only one such analysis that for a planet being combust, has been described in this paper.
 

The Model

However, on the basis of the pointers obtained from the two types of analysis of planetary behavior positional and functional, a model can be attempted to be evolved that considers these pointers and attempts to grade planets in terms of their eligibility to appear in the various position of a planetary sequence. The model can be assumed to be evolving in the correct direction if the incidence of planetary sequences indicated by the model to correspond to the birth date of the mother, form a fairly close match to the planetary sequence that actually corresponds to the birth date of the mother on the Vimsottari dasa calendar for the chart.

From the analysis of functional and positional attributes in the preceding discussion, it is seen that a planet can possess a high degree of eligibility and yet will not find a place in the higher echelons of the date defining planetary sequence. On the other hand, a planet with little or no direct eligibility can don the role of an initiator or giver by virtue of its interaction with other eligible planets. This situation calls for defining a planet's ability to participate in the event bestowing exercise under two heads one parameter that defines its effectiveness in participating at a particular position in the sequence and the other parameter being its potential strength that reflects its ability to do so within the defined sequence level. I have termed these parameters as 'Degree of Effectiveness' or DoE and 'Functional Potential' or FP. The latter term encompasses the combined effects of both positional attributes and functional attributes.

If we were to summarize the arguments formulated so far for evolving a possible model, it can be represented diagrammatically as follows:

It will now be required to link the two sets of parameters in the diagram above. While the set on the left has so far only be expressed as trends, the one on the right has a definite numerical form. The need therefore will be to express the trends themselves in numerical form. Before embarking on this exercise, it will be appropriate to list the possible positional features and the manner of interactions that a planet is subject to, as generally mentioned in all astrological texts.
 
 
Table 6
Individual positional attributes Interactive modes of being influenced
1. Influence of sign of residence 1. Influence of sign dispositor
2. Type of apparent motion 2. Influence of lunar mansion dispositor
3. Placement in 'fatal' points 3. Influence of other planets posited in the
sign(s) over which planet wields lordship
4. Computable overall strength with definite
threshold levels (Shadbala)
4. Influence of other planets posited in lunar
mansion(s) over which planet wields lordship
5. Occupation of planet specific directions 5. Influence of conjunctions
6. Close proximity to the Sun 6. Influence of aspects
7. Close proximity to another planet leading to
the phenomenon of 'Planetary war'
8. Placement between malefics on both
adjacent signs.

It may be argued that there is some measure of overlapping in the above list of parameters considered. For instance, the Shadbala[6] computation includes components that account for influence of the sign of residence, occupation of planet specific directions (directional strength) and 'Planetary war'. The reason that I have listed them separately can be explained by the following analogy. Consider a student taking an examination in a subject that has 10 sections, with a question from each section appearing in the question paper. It is required that the student answer any six questions correctly of the ten, to pass. There are two possible outcomes of the examination the student may pass or fail. If the student were to pass correctly attempting six questions, it could be that he knows answers to all the questions or he does not know the answers to one or more of the four questions that he did not attempt. If the latter were to be the case, the stigma that he is not good in one or more sections of the subject remains with him, although he has passed the examination. This is precisely how I see the question of shadbala and some of its components. A planet may have a shadbala that is greater than the deemed minimum level. The stigma that it is blemished in certain respects however remains and is reflected in its demeanor. If it were to have a shadbala below the minimum level, this only becomes an additional blemish that the planet sports.

This argument is extendable to interactive modes of influences as well. Planetary aspect for instance, is included in the computation of shadbala. Yet the full aspect of an inimical planet needs to be considered separately when assessing a planet's influence with regard to an event and this cannot be evaluated based on the shadbala alone.

Another argument could be that why only some of the components of shadbala have been separately listed and why not all the others. The response to this will be that only such components, about which there has been some emphatic mention in the texts, have been considered separately. This will certainly not mean that certain other components that have not been included may not have a decisive influence in the making or marring of an event. It has been possible to account for all planetary behavior on the basis of the possible effects of the listed parameters. If a situation were to arise when this were not to be possible, then some of the other components depending on the degree of importance credited to them in the texts, will be included into the model.

Having crossed the hurdle of defining the parametric set for allocating numerical equivalents for the tendencies exhibited by planets under defined conditions, we will see how the allocation itself has been designed.
 

Converting trends, tendencies and pointers to numerical equivalents

Deliberating first on the domain of positional tendencies, it should be reasonable to assume that each planet can be assigned a certain score on a standard numerical scale that reflects its strength in a sign/lunar mansion. Such a score will consider a planet's disposition vis-à-vis the sign and lunar mansion dispositors. The term 'disposition' here echoes the concept expressed in astrological texts about the friendly, inimical or neutral relationships between planets. The standard numerical scale chosen for the model is one that has a range 0 to 4 where 0 represents an entirely inimical position, 2 - a neutral position and 4 an extremely friendly position. Assignment of scores on this scale to planets in each given position of the zodiac is universally applicable to all charts and is not chart specific. For ease of identification, we will call this the P-Score.

Such scores only reflect the state of a planet when the planet and the sign/lunar mansion dispositors are themselves in an unblemished state and there are no other influences on them by way of conjunction, aspects and the like. This represents an ideal situation. A measure of the actual state can be had after taking into account all such disturbances. This exercise will require quantifying the disturbances as well.

Looking at a specific example that of Jupiter in Cancer in the lunar mansion of Saturn, Table 7 analyses various ways that the score for Jupiter gets modified depending on the state of Jupiter itself, state of sign dispositor Moon, lunar mansion dispositor Saturn and other influences. The analysis is based on the actual exercise of computing scores for the 796 charts in the sample set being considered for this application.

As explained earlier, all planets involved in the process of modification of the score of the planet in question (Jupiter) including Jupiter itself, are first subject to the analysis to find out whether they sport an even number or an odd number of blemishes. If they sport an even number, they are deemed unblemished and if odd then blemished.

Table 7, lists the number of times that Jupiter obtains a score between the ranges specified under each of the four possible planet/dispositor combinations. The figures would indicate that when both Jupiter and Moon are unblemished, Jupiter tends to have a higher score than when either one is blemished. There are exceptions though, brought about by other influences on Jupiter.
 
 
 
Table 7
Jupiter in the sign Cancer and in the lunar mansion of Saturn
( Incidence of this combination : 50 / 796 )
P-Score ranges 0 >0 & <=1 >1 & <=2 >2 & <=3 >3 
Both Jupiter and Moon
unblemished
0 3 16 5 3
Jupiter blemished,
Moon unblemished
3 2 3 0 0
Jupiter unblemished
Moon blemished
0 2 4 3 0
Both Jupiter and Moon
blemished
0 0 3 3 0

In a way, the results above can be looked upon as being forced as they have been assigned according to rules framed that mimic my thoughts on how planets may interact and the possible incremental scores that can be assigned for such interactions. The point however is, that if such rules that force certain patterns of results are consistently applicable giving the desired results, then they may be deemed to be workable and acceptable rules.
 

Converting interactions to numerical equivalents

It stands to reason that arguments about the weakness or strength of the sign dispositor affecting the strength of the planet posited in the sign, can be extended to assess the result of interaction between any two planets. Under this premise, it can be argued that two friendly planets will interact positively when both have a P-Score greater than or equal to two. Similarly, two planets that are mutually inimical will react positively when either one has a P-Score less than 2 while the other has a P-Score greater than or equal to two.

There would be many variations possible here due to the fact that planets need not be mutually inimical or mutually friendly. For instance, considering the interaction between Jupiter and Saturn, the latter is inimical to the former but the converse is not true.

As the status of a planet has been expressed in numerical terms in the preceding step, their interaction too can be expressed so. This however, will only refer to the interaction due to positional considerations. This base value of interaction is enhanced by a factor commensurate with the E-scores of both planets. This enhanced score considering functional eligibility, can be called the F-Score which can be stated in terms of DoE and FP. The sum of all the F-Scores for a planet due to its interaction with every other planet in the chart will then reflect the total potential of the planet (in terms of DoE and FP) to participate in the event giving sequence.

Table 8 lists the F-Scores for all occurrences of the combination Jupiter in Cancer, in the sample set of 796 charts.
 
Table 8
F-Scores of Jupiter in the sign Cancer ( Incidence of this combination : 82 / 796 )
F-Score ranges  <0  0 >0 & <=1 >1 & <=2 >2 & <=3 >3 & <=4 >4 & <=5 >5 & <=6
Both Jupiter and 
Moon unblemished
7 9 3 1 1 0 1 1
Jupiter blemished,
Moon unblemished
1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0
Jupiter unblemished
Moon blemished
1 4 0 1 1 0 0 0
Both Jupiter and 
Moon blemished
2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0

It can be seen from the figures in the Table 8 that the status of the planet alone does not ensure it a good F-Score. The acquisition of a good F-Score also depends upon the E-Scores and P-Scores of the planet and sign dispositor. Any of the four planet/sign dispositor combination can result in a positive F-Score that in turn enhances the claim of the planet to participate in the planetary sequence that point to the birth date of the mother.

The numbers in the table add up to 41 which is half of the total number of occurrences of Jupiter in Cancer. This reflects the consequence of the assumption that a fruitful interaction is possible only if, in addition to the two planets interacting planets having the proper P-Scores, the interacting planet (Moon in this case) should also possess the functional qualification of being a fourth cusp dispositor. In all instances where this qualification is not met, the F-Score will be zero. This feature differentiates those cases that have been listed in Table 8 to have an F-Score of 0 despite the Moon being qualified as per the above mentioned norm.

Table 9, lists the DoE and FP values so obtained for an example chart and the derived planetary sequence from these values.
 
Table 9
Planet Sun Moon Mars Mercury Jupiter Venus Saturn Raahu Ketu
E-Score 0 2 1 0 1 2 1 1 1
DoE 0 -3 2 0 -1 -1 1 0 0
FP 3.84 0.78 1.66 17.22 4.73 20.93 7.12 2.54 2.38
Sequence Saturn / Mars / Venus / Mercury / Jupiter

Any eligible planet with a DoE value of 0 and above, can don the role of an initiator. The backward extrapolation of the Vimsottari dasa calendar will indicate which of the nine entities will qualify for this role. The DoE/FP combination will then determine the remaining positions in the sequence.

The model as it has evolved up to now, has been coded as a computer program. The computations based on this model seem to be giving reasonably consistent results for birth data clusters for specific periods. It is believed that a definite indication as to whether the assumption that 'parents are by design' is provable, can be had only when the sample size increases to about 20,000 charts.

The author welcomes suggestions from and interaction with readers and can be reached at ramastro@satyam.net.in


[1]  The Vimsottari dasa scheme considers a definite span of time in years as the period of operation for each of the nine entities the Sun through Saturn and the nodes of the Moon. The total number years for all planets adds up to 120 years hence the name Vimsottari. The planet ruling at birth and the point of reference within its span of operation corresponding to the moment of birth is determined by the natal position of the Moon. « Text

[2]  Brihat Paraasara Hora Saastra, chapter 7, verse 39 to 43. « Text

[3]  Jaataka Paarijaata, chapter 18, verse 38. « Text

[4]  Planets are listed in the descending order of the lengths of the angular distance traversed in their respective signs of residence. The first in this list becomes the Aatma Kaaraka or 'Soul significator' for the chart. The fourth in this list is deemed to be the significator of mother. « Text

[5]  Dvaadasaamsa chart - The chart marking the position of planets in segments corresponding to 1/12 of each sign (2º 30'). This chart is suggested to be looked into for events and matters concerning parents. « Text

[6]  Shadbala or sixfold strength, determines the strength of a planet in a chart under the following six heads: Positional strength, Directional strength, Temporal strength, Motional strength, Natural strength and Aspectual strength. « Text


 
Reference of the page:
R. Ramakrishnan: Parents - by Choice, Chance or Design?
http://cura.free.fr/xxx/27ramak.html
-----------------------
All rights reserved © 2003 R. Ramakrishnan

HOME
ACCUEIL
C.U.R.A.
PORTADA
Centre Universitaire de Recherche en Astrologie
Web site Designer & Editor: Patrice Guinard
© 1999-2003 Dr. Patrice Guinard